If our equipment like radars, camera, sensors and other electronics are lighter and occupying less space then all that area can be used for carrying more fuel and more weapons.
That will provide better service ceiling , endurance and firepower to UCAVs.

It is not about battery or heat.

Can your old CPU handle all those data, sensor fusion and programs related to artificial intelligence without breaking down ??

Why you don't use your old 40 nm CPU in one plus 1 ??

That will give you 10 years of mobile life.

Click to expand...

It is not as simple as you say. Just by reducing the processor size, you won't be reducing the weight drastically. How much of a difference do you think a pentium 4 (180nm) was from intel i3(22nm)?

The few kgs of added weight means nothing. We can't just make the weight 0. It would be better to use composite than use such cheap products.

High performance devices require not just high processing but also reliability. You are mistaking architecture for technology. Transistor architecture is what determines performance. Transistor technology like 22nm,180nm is what determines power size and weight. It is not necessary that 180nm processor is worse than 22nm ones. The architecture can be same for both and hence give same performance but with 180nm ones consuming higher power. Moreover, there is a massive difference between processors of PCs and dedicated processors. PC processors require processing of almost any data while the dedicated ones only need to process specific data and have specific usage. For example, UAV processor need not process graphics, movies etc and definitely do not need to use heavy use softwares like Matlab. They have limited processing needs and only those logics need to be written on them. The display or output is also limited.

The heat release during flight from engines air drag or even high temperatures of the sun's heat will be more than enough to glitch 22nm or less processors. The whole point of making smaller transistor is to reduce power consumption to be used in battery powered devices. As the size decreases, accuracy of transistor making reduces and the chip gets higher number of faulty transistors. The limited weight savings will not be worth it. The whole problem of thin wafer processors is exactly that - they are too thin and made of fragile technology. The more robust technology needs thicker wafers. The transistor gets weakened with thickness reduction and becomes more susceptible to errors and glitches when subjected to hostile environments. Moreover, testing over a decade for reliability is also needed. The slight increase in power consumption is not a problem at all, especially considering that turbofan produces several KW of power in a jet. If you are comparing vacuum tubes with transistor, then you have to look at power, size etc.

It is not as simple as you say. Just by reducing the processor size, you won't be reducing the weight drastically. How much of a difference do you think a pentium 4 (180nm) was from intel i3(22nm)?

The few kgs of added weight means nothing. We can't just make the weight 0. It would be better to use composite than use such cheap products.

High performance devices require not just high processing but also reliability. You are mistaking architecture for technology. Transistor architecture is what determines performance. Transistor technology like 22nm,180nm is what determines power size and weight. It is not necessary that 180nm processor is worse than 22nm ones. The architecture can be same for both and hence give same performance but with 180nm ones consuming higher power. Moreover, there is a massive difference between processors of PCs and dedicated processors. PC processors require processing of almost any data while the dedicated ones only need to process specific data and have specific usage. For example, UAV processor need not process graphics, movies etc and definitely do not need to use heavy use softwares like Matlab. They have limited processing needs and only those logics need to be written on them. The display or output is also limited.

The heat release during flight from engines air drag or even high temperatures of the sun's heat will be more than enough to glitch 22nm or less processors. The whole point of making smaller transistor is to reduce power consumption to be used in battery powered devices. As the size decreases, accuracy of transistor making reduces and the chip gets higher number of faulty transistors. The limited weight savings will not be worth it. The whole problem of thin wafer processors is exactly that - they are too thin and made of fragile technology. The more robust technology needs thicker wafers. The transistor gets weakened with thickness reduction and becomes more susceptible to errors and glitches when subjected to hostile environments. Moreover, testing over a decade for reliability is also needed. The slight increase in power consumption is not a problem at all, especially considering that turbofan produces several KW of power in a jet. If you are comparing vacuum tubes with transistor, then you have to look at power, size etc.

Click to expand...

It is not only about processor but entire motherboard and other electronics.

Look at the old generation laptop

And new generation laptop, can you see the difference in weight and size ?

Now check the SAR of Indian rustom 2 and American preditor.

Can you see the range & weight difference between the indian and American Synthetic Aperture radars ?

All these extra weight reduces the endurance, range and service ceilings.

Now add this weight differences of all the equipment & electronics used.....that could be used by fuel or other weapons /sensors.

old fabrication process may be good for ground based equipment but for any airborne equipment weight is very important thing.

so basically, you want to say that there is no need to do research and development for upliftment of Technology.
if you didn't want to do any work than please let others free to do so.

Click to expand...

What? I am saying that even if the technology is uplifted, it is not to be used in UAV or AMCA.
Are you high on substance?

The 22nm technology is for Mobile phones and computers. India is increasingly using smartphone and it is necessary to manufacture wafers on a commercial scale for that in order to prevent imports. As much indigenous production as possible is needed in every aspect, civilian or military.

Just because you have made a miniaturised pants (shorts) doesn't mean you wear it to office, right?

Where you are supposed to use what, use that there.

For God's sake, don't install video game in your SAMTEL system saying that 'I want to work more'

What? I am saying that even if the technology is uplifted, it is not to be used in UAV or AMCA.
Are you high on substance?

The 22nm technology is for Mobile phones and computers. India is increasingly using smartphone and it is necessary to manufacture wafers on a commercial scale for that in order to prevent imports. As much indigenous production as possible is needed in every aspect, civilian or military.

Just because you have made a miniaturised pants (shorts) doesn't mean you wear it to office, right?

Where you are supposed to use what, use that there.

Click to expand...

everytime you veered off from the topic.
in your previous post you called it useless and now you are appreciating it.

1. There in no 5000 to 6000 times area savings from 120nm to 16nm. And considering size of Aircraft, Area of a chips in negligible and doesn't really matter on which technology it is implemented.
2. Lower technology nodes (180 - 90 nm) are much robust with respect to many design parameters and offer much more accuracy for Analog & RF circuits which are significant part of electronics in Aircraft (Radar Circuits and Filters).
3. TSMC, Samsung and many other FABs does at-least 4 years research on solving different problems in fabrication process. They will never share those details with any other company. So don't expect 16nm Fab in india in atleast 10 years.
4. India has very good talent pool of designers (Analog and Digital) and can complete given project from scratch.
5. Half of the development work of all American semi-conductor gaints is being done in Banglore.

Regarding the comparison of the Synthetic aperture radar, Weight difference is not due to electronics but due to the body, Packaging, Transmitter and receiver antenna etc. Even if you design all these systems in latest technology, I am really sure you will not get more than a 1 KG gain in weight which is mainly due to packaging of chips.

Yes, you are right. Indian technology does lag behind USA technology. But that is not due the transistor technology. India, in general doesn't have IC technology manufacturing (except laboratory) or even the circuit board manufacturing.

By the way, your article states that Chinese engines use heavier items as it lacks the right alloys. So, it is not exactly chipset or electronic problems.

I am not fully aware of what is the deficiency but replacing smaller chipset instead of larger ones is a big no.

1. There in no 5000 to 6000 times area savings from 120nm to 16nm. And considering size of Aircraft, Area of a chips in negligible and doesn't really matter on which technology it is implemented.
2. Lower technology nodes (180 - 90 nm) are much robust with respect to many design parameters and offer much more accuracy for Analog & RF circuits which are significant part of electronics in Aircraft (Radar Circuits and Filters).
3. TSMC, Samsung and many other FABs does at-least 4 years research on solving different problems in fabrication process. They will never share those details with any other company. So don't expect 16nm Fab in india in atleast 10 years.
4. India has very good talent pool of designers (Analog and Digital) and can complete given project from scratch.
5. Half of the development work of all American semi-conductor gaints is being done in Banglore.

Regarding the comparison of the Synthetic aperture radar, Weight difference is not due to electronics but due to the body, Packaging, Transmitter and receiver antenna etc. Even if you design all these systems in latest technology, I am really sure you will not get more than a 1 KG gain in weight which is mainly due to packaging of chips.

Click to expand...

Not only processor but all the other electronics, radars, radars and camera are heavier in Indian drones.....

There will be no big difference between the weight and size of 16 nm and 180 nm processor but after including all the electronics, sensors and payload there is a big difference.

Not only processor but all the other electronics, radars, radars and camera are heavier in Indian drones.....

Click to expand...

These problems cann't be solved with latest fabrication technologies. There should be considerable amount of research in Materials. We lack mostly in this domain where west has advanced pretty fast. Our radar emitters and Receivers are outdated. Our image sensors are not best in world. These are all most important things.

everytime you veered off from the topic.
in your previous post you called it useless and now you are appreciating it.

Click to expand...

Useless depends on context. I am speaking in context of UAV/AMCA. In this topic, 22nm is useless. Nothing is absolutely useless in every single circumstance. 22nm is extremely important for saving forex and providing jobs to people, improving manufacturing capabilities in global scale etc. How do you expect to buy technology like Reaper drones, Israeli seekers (Barak missiles), spike missiles etc without forex? International trade requires forex. We can trade civilian items and use the forex to buy military items. As long as we are not technology or resources sufficient, we need to improve export import balance

Useless depends on context. I am speaking in context of UAV/AMCA. In this topic, 22nm is useless. Nothing is absolutely useless in every single circumstance. 22nm is extremely important for saving forex and providing jobs to people, improving manufacturing capabilities in global scale etc. How do you expect to buy technology like Reaper drones, Israeli seekers (Barak missiles), spike missiles etc without forex? International trade requires forex. We can trade civilian items and use the forex to buy military items. As long as we are not technology or resources sufficient, we need to improve export import balance

Click to expand...

dude, it will be good for both UAV/UCAV and economy development in long term.
as you compared P4 and Corei i3, than please also compare their clock speed.

also, in long term if you have your own chip level electronic industry than you have no dependency on others for electronics spares. This makes u self-reliant and it will help to give thurst to economy as future will be electronic dependent.

dude, it will be good for both UAV/UCAV and economy development in long term.
as you compared P4 and Corei i3, than please also compare their clock speed.

also, in long term if you have your own chip level electronic industry than you have no dependency on others for electronics spares. This makes u self-reliant and it will help to give thurst to economy as future will be electronic dependent.

Good economy might solve most of your problems.

Click to expand...

Which IIT did you study in? Can't you even read what I said? I said that we need 22nm chip manufacturing but that must not be used for UAV. Pentium 4 is 180nm, but the architecture is also outdated. If the same Broadwell Architecture is used then the only difference between P4 and I3 will be few grams of weight and few watts of power which is negligible for a plane but important for battery operated devices.

I know that economy is important. I am. Just saying that there is a difference between needs of industrial/military goods and consumer goods. Both are needed but not interchangeable

Which IIT did you study in? Can't you even read what I said? I said that we need 22nm chip manufacturing but that must not be used for UAV. Pentium 4 is 180nm, but the architecture is also outdated. If the same Broadwell Architecture is used then the only difference between P4 and I3 will be few grams of weight and few watts of power which is negligible for a plane but important for battery operated devices.

I know that economy is important. I am. Just saying that there is a difference between needs of industrial/military goods and consumer goods. Both are needed but not interchangeable

Click to expand...

kamal ka dhakkan hai bhai.
why don't you compare the clock speed. When there is something which is airborne without any physical pilot than it requires a highly responsive hardware with very high data processing rate.
you are arguing on something which is totally bullshit. As you said, you don't have much knowledge about it than why are you putting your head in between?

kamal ka dhakkan hai bhai.
why don't you compare the clock speed. When there is something which is airborne without any physical pilot than it requires a highly responsive hardware with very high data processing rate.
you are arguing on something which is totally bullshit. As you said, you don't have much knowledge about it than why are you putting your head in between?

Click to expand...

Just because size of transistor is 180nm doesn't mean it has low clock rate. It has higher power consumption for the same clock rate than 22nm one. Since power available is not a constraint for turbofan run UAV or AMCA, consuming a 100 watt more is not a problem.

I said I am not sure of the reason why radar etc have higher weight but I am sure that it is not due to processor.

Just because size of transistor is 18thismean it has low clock rate. It has higher power consumption for the same clock rate than 22nm one. Since power available is not a constraint for turbofan run UAV or AMCA, consuming a 100 watt more is not a problem.

I said I am not sure of the reason why radar etc have higher weight but I am sure that it is not due to processor.

Click to expand...

May I know, what is the average weight of the CPU of a computer?
If you can answer this question than surely, you can get your answer in it.

1. There in no 5000 to 6000 times area savings from 120nm to 16nm. And considering size of Aircraft, Area of a chips in negligible and doesn't really matter on which technology it is implemented.
2. Lower technology nodes (180 - 90 nm) are much robust with respect to many design parameters and offer much more accuracy for Analog & RF circuits which are significant part of electronics in Aircraft (Radar Circuits and Filters).
3. TSMC, Samsung and many other FABs does at-least 4 years research on solving different problems in fabrication process. They will never share those details with any other company. So don't expect 16nm Fab in india in atleast 10 years.
4. India has very good talent pool of designers (Analog and Digital) and can complete given project from scratch.
5. Half of the development work of all American semi-conductor gaints is being done in Banglore.

Regarding the comparison of the Synthetic aperture radar, Weight difference is not due to electronics but due to the body, Packaging, Transmitter and receiver antenna etc. Even if you design all these systems in latest technology, I am really sure you will not get more than a 1 KG gain in weight which is mainly due to packaging of chips.

Click to expand...

one of the main difference in weight i assume will be in power amplifier for TX and RX modules. The US one are much lighter I guess, but I never seen an Indian one for UAV's radios

If our equipment like radars, camera, sensors and other electronics are lighter and occupying less space then all that area can be used for carrying more fuel and more weapons.
That will provide better service ceiling , endurance and firepower to UCAVs.

It is not about battery or heat.

Can your old CPU handle all those data, sensor fusion and programs related to artificial intelligence without breaking down ??

kamal ka dhakkan hai bhai.
why don't you compare the clock speed. When there is something which is airborne without any physical pilot than it requires a highly responsive hardware with very high data processing rate.
you are arguing on something which is totally bullshit. As you said, you don't have much knowledge about it than why are you putting your head in between?

May I know, what is the average weight of the CPU of a computer?
If you can answer this question than surely, you can get your answer in it.

Good Luck

Click to expand...

Ok before I begin let me explain microprocessor architecture and design in laymans terms. Consider all the transistors on the silicon wafer as buildings in a city. Now if you want to have large number of people in city (processing power) then you have two options:-
1. Construct those buildings as close as possible, cramming as many people as possible. That is reducing g the CPU architecture from 40nm to 10nm.

2. Construct buildings as you did earlier but have quad the bandwidth for data transmission between the remote buildings. Also reduce people's time ie 12 hr day ( did not have a analogue for clock speed increase from 2ghz to 4ghz).

Now you can see that even with modern construction methods and tools (10nm architecture) you can design very bad and unplanned cities that come to crashing halt with a little rain. But in the same place old, sleepy and highly distributed cities find it little nuisance with rains or traffic.

Though that was a very crude example but will get the idea across.Though a 40nm architecture may be prehistoric for people out here but if you design a RISC or CISC processors for one specialist job, they can perform better than 10nm chips in some regards. The 40nm chips will be highly resilient to thermal leaks and Quantum tunneling. They would not require heavy cooling even when your are pushing heavy current through them. Thermal leaks are a real possibility even in best designed 10nm chips. You literally have few atom wide gaps between two components.

Now coming to smaller sizes of the end products. That's to do with packageing. No matter if you have 4nm architecture and you leave air gaps between different sub components on the board. You will end up with a heaftier end product. Everyone now would be aware how the first gen iPods where thick and Steve rejected the design bcoz when he dropped it in a fish tank there where air bubbles. That's how the trend of flat packageing stuck to Apple products. And anyone who has ever played games on such compact devices will attested they get HOT! All 12nm and below chips will throttle their clocks to half or even below when they are near tMax and completely shutdown at tMax.

@airtel as for the AN/APY-8 pleas check the power that is available for it to utilise. 713kW from its turbo prop engine. Rustom II / H has measely 146kW combined from both engines. There isn't enough power to get that range even if we have the same hardware. Plus as i said before with the amount of current going through those Tx/Rx modules, they better stick to 40nm architecture rather than 10nm...

Another thing to remember is these are "Military Grade" electronics.It is not same as consumer grade electronics. The components are hardened and heavy duty. We will get 10nm RISC and CISC chips in future but after rigorous testing and refinement of the design. Even when we get them they will have heavy reliability issues.